On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Oct 25, 2015 12:53, "Jan Kratochvil" <jan.kratochvil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 01:07:47 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> > I built 4.1 for rawhide. If that checks out to be OK, I can push
>> > an update for F23 also.
>>
>> I do not understand why a major rebase could be permitted after all the
>> F-23
>> freezing stages? It may cause FTBFSes or even broken builds. What is
>> then
>> all the release engineering good for? Why not to just run Rawhide then?
>>
>
> I have to agree. I have been bitten too many times by minor tweaks breaking
> builds in the OS. However the rules where a completely frozen build system
> was causing problems in the past so I am expecting make is considered less
> important than gcc?
We have been shipping gcc bugfix updates all the time ... there is no
reason why we shouldn't do the same for make.
And unlike major gcc bumps, make bumps don't require mass rebuilds, since it's just a user tool and things don't link to it.
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
